Would a baalat teshuva need a get from each previous sexual relationship? In light of the idea that marriage can be contracted solely through bi'ah/public knowledge of the couple's relationship (as discussed here and here), would a woman who has had previous sexual relationships--perhaps a baalat teshuva--need a get from each one in order to be married again? What other obligations rest on her previous partners?

NOTE: If this situation is relevant to you, please consult with your Rabbi.

Even if your logic holds true, you'd prob only need a get from the first one. I don't think a woman can be married to more than one man at a time.
–
Hahu GavraMay 4 '12 at 14:56

3

@HahuGavra ... unless each one creates an possible ("safek") marriage, in which case, it might be that we'd consider each one to possibly have taken effect, assuming all the previous ones hadn't. I expect, though, that this logic would only apply if it was logically consistent, which would be if the uncertainty is about a matter of fact that could vary per relationship and not about a matter of law that applies to all of them equally.
–
Isaac MosesMay 4 '12 at 15:33

1

... but the safek would IIUC be whether this sort of relationship takes effect; so the bottom line is still either the first took effect, or none. So need a get from the first.
–
yitznewtonMay 4 '12 at 16:39

1

@yitznewton Only if it's a sefeika dedina. If it's a safek metzius (like did she have daat kiddushin) then she would need from all of them.
–
Double AA♦May 4 '12 at 17:05

Agreed. I assumed that we are talking about no-daat-kiddushin unions here.
–
yitznewtonMay 4 '12 at 17:46

what if it was a long-term relationship where they lived together?
–
MenachemMay 6 '12 at 23:40

And wouldn't the public sexual relationship itself in fact be considered a marriage by some standards?
–
SAHMay 16 '12 at 13:15

1

@Menachem, even a long term committed relationship does not normally include marital intent. SAH, do you know people who say "oh, everyone knows they live together and are intimate, so they're married"? No one believes that public sexual relationships are some sort of de facto marriages. Maybe if they were together long enough that one might begin consideration of a common-law spouse, OK, I hear the question. I can't imagine this happens more than once in anyone's life, and never in most lifetimes.
–
Ze'ev FelsenJul 24 '12 at 4:40

@Menachem A) I explicitly mentioned this possibility in my response to SAH. B) It is going to be pretty rare. Common law marriage requires quite a few years. Again, see my comment immediately above.
–
Ze'ev FelsenJul 24 '12 at 5:02